Hi,
Actually you are right. Sorry for that. I am using v2.59 which is Ubuntu
Repository
I had one question , maybe out of scope, Is it possible to use Coova and
Dnsmasq on same host and by turning off coova's DHCP and using Dnsmasq
as DHCP Server?
Thanks,
Prashant
On Thursday 31 July 2014

On 30/07/14 07:35, Joel Krauska wrote:
I've seen a few interesting proposals for running dnsmasq in a redundant
way.
(running active/passive and trying to keep leases updated atomically, eg.
using a db)
But I haven't seen an actual implementation documented anywhere.
Those concepts

On 31/07/14 13:23, Simon Kelley wrote:
On 30/07/14 07:35, Joel Krauska wrote:
I've seen a few interesting proposals for running dnsmasq in a redundant
way.
(running active/passive and trying to keep leases updated atomically, eg.
using a db)
But I haven't seen an actual implementation

On 24/07/14 04:13, Linux Luser wrote:
I have a project where I use dnsmasq for netboot installs. Currently, there
can be an unlimited number of installs happened at once. At what point
(number of TFTP transfers happening in parallel) should I be concerned that
I'm overtaxing dnsmasq's TFTP

On 24/07/14 08:20, 毕勤 wrote:
Well,I just figured out that it might due to the DNS Hijack of China's
Great Firewall.
The GFW hijack the DNS process and return a fake response pacakge,with the
response code=0(means no error) but no Answer RRs(Answer RRs=0).It's
obviously unlogical but

One option here is to use iPXE ( http://www.ipxe.org/ ) to grab the
netboot files via HTTP (or some other protocol) instead of relying on
TFTP. There's some extra configuration work here, but serving up the
365KB iPXE image to clients via TFTP is a lot less work then serving up
the entire

Thanks guys. That gives me some good things to think about and prepare for.
On Jul 31, 2014 12:33 PM, Brian Rak b...@gameservers.com wrote:
One option here is to use iPXE ( http://www.ipxe.org/ ) to grab the
netboot files via HTTP (or some other protocol) instead of relying on
TFTP. There's